jscott Posted 7 March , 2014 Share Posted 7 March , 2014 Hi all I've been looking for a German 71/84 bayonet for a while now, and finally chanced upon this one. Despite being far from a pristine example I really like the fact that its had a tough life, and most interestingly has some nice regimental markings as well. I'm looking to do a little research on these markings to see what I can determine about the bayonet's history, but I have found conflicting evidence as to the markings online. I know that the "MG" section of the marking refers to a machine gun company, however does anyone know whether the full marking refers to a company of the 36th Regiment or Reserve Regiment? I have found references to both online. Also, presumably these bayonets were issued to machine gun companies as they were obsolete by the time WW1 started and thus would have been carried more as a side arm than a bayonet - does that sound right? Thanks all, J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 7 March , 2014 Share Posted 7 March , 2014 Hi J, I believe the regimental marking indicates it was issued to the Machine Gun detachment of the 36th Infantry Regiment. [Disclaimer ... this is only my opinion and no correspondence will be entered into.] And the full title of this unit is appropriately grandiose ... Füsilier-Regt. General-Feldmarschall Graf Blumenthal (1.Magdeburgisches) Nr.36 (Halle a. S.. II Bernburg) IV Armee Korps So the markings should read ... 36th Fusilier-Regiment, Maschinengewehr-Kompagnie, Waffe Nr. 32 ... (oh and made by WKC) Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 8 March , 2014 Share Posted 8 March , 2014 Congrats on getting one of the most influential items in bayonet history! This is THE one that influenced the design of the Mannlicher 95, the US and Mexican Remington 1889's and countless others! It is essentially the first knife bayonet - and yours still has its muzzle ring and those shaped walnut grips, the former often having been lopped off in 1908-1909 (according to Carter) to conform to the 84/98 specification and the grips sometimes having been changed! I AM envious but also pleased for you! And the condition is not that bad, and is to be ignored given the rarity of an unaltered example! What year? How long are the fullers (short fullers with a square end before the point are according to Carter pre-1888, longer fullers going into the point are 1888-1889 - but I have a record of a long fullered example dated W/87). Now to the markings, 36. R.M.G. 32. SS is pretty much spot on - 36. (Fusilier) Regiment, Maschinengewehr-Kompagnie (Waffe) 32. Just need to note that this was in the 15th Infantry brigade in the 8th Division of the IV Army, and the unit was disbanded on 21.03.1915 - see http://wiki-de.genealogy.net/15._Infanterie-Brigade All that needs to be added re: the markings (my source is Carter) is that MG companies received these unaltered 71/84's only after the introduction into service of the Gew. 98, so these markings date from then or later. Also note that according to a German reference on who wore what sidearm in 1914, by that year it was only the Sanitatsmannschaften or medical bods of the Machine gun companies who had the unaltered 71/84, the machine gunners and their crew by that time all having the kS 98. So, all in all, a very nice piece! And the marking suggests that if this was in service in WWI, then it was with the medical bods of the 36.R.M.G., a unit that was presumably disbanded along with its brigade in 1915! Once again, a nice find - all you need now, I assume, is the leather scabbard...!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 8 March , 2014 Share Posted 8 March , 2014 Just happened on some nice pieces of physical evidence to support the claim that the 71/84's were given to MG units after previously having been used by regular infantry. For example, a scabbard marked '40.R.13.101', then re-marked '141.R.5.101', and final marking '113.R.M.G.13.'; I give this as an example: there are at least three other scabbards with the same sequence, one or more 'R' markings followed by a 'R.M.G' marking, in each of these three cases with a matching bayonet marked for the MG company. Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 8 March , 2014 Share Posted 8 March , 2014 My German reference has all NCO's and men of the Machine Gun Companies being issued with the S71/84 as sidearms (as of pre-war 1914) They did not fit any current service rifle. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 8 March , 2014 Share Posted 8 March , 2014 My German reference has all NCO's and men of the Machine Gun Companies being issued with the S71/84 as sidearms (as of pre-war 1914) They did not fit any current service rifle. Cheers, S>S I would dearly love to have this German reference you have spelled out - also the one you referred to in another post! Just like to check for myself! But yes, you are quite right, that after about 1898 up to 1914, NCO's and men in the MG companies got the unaltered 71/84's. You clearly know the third rule of teaching! Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 8 March , 2014 Share Posted 8 March , 2014 Just occurred to me that when our cousins over the pond wake up then they might want to challenge the claim that the 71/84 is the first knife bayonet, so I thought I'd better counter that! OK, some US of A collectors claim that the first knife bayonet as such was the so-called Dahlgren bayonet with its 307.9 mm. (12 1/8 inch) blade and an S-shaped crossguard incorporating a muzzle ring. This was developed in 1856 by Capt. (later Admiral) J.A.Dahlgren, for use with the Plymouth rifle, and was brought into general service in the US Navy in 1861. Dahlgren allegedly claimed that the long sword bayonet originally supplied with these rifles was the "most useless thing in the world except at the end of a musket", describing his own invention as "… a short, broad and stout knife of the well known bowie-pattern, the principal use of which I designed to be in the hand in close conflict as in boarding” (http://www.horsesoldier.com/products/edged-weapons/bayonets/1085#sthash.wnJG9y8X.dpuf). As it is, the known examples rarely fit the rifle they were supposed to, and it is now generally accepted that Dahlgren called his design a bayonet because the Ordnance Board would not sanction the development and introduction into service of a weapon for close combat that was described as a knife. Whatever the singular aspects of the Dahlgren bayonet, though, the fact is that it was never copied by anyone else, while almost immediately after coming into service the basic design of the S 71/84 was being copied by others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jscott Posted 8 March , 2014 Author Share Posted 8 March , 2014 Thanks both, I agree that the marking would indicate the 36 regiment (as opposed to the 36 reserve regiment). Now to do a little research (although initial searching indicates that they may have been involved at Pozieres, which is the WW1 battle I'm most interested in. Ill need to do a little more research to confirm. Anyway here are a few more shots showing the other relevant markings. Cheers, J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 8 March , 2014 Share Posted 8 March , 2014 A W/88. Joint WK and C and Erfurt marked bayonets were made in 87 and 88. I am guessing that WK and C were the blade makers and Erfurt the bayonet finishers, but can't be certain on that. S>S>, you got a handle on that? Long fullers on this one? Incidentally, since I made my initial contribution I have found a Carter ref. to an O/86 71/84 m.S. with long fullers, but this seems to be a caption mistake for O96 - Bavaria liked the short bayonet and there are Bavarian 71/84's marked O/95, O/96, and O/97. Still a teeny weeny itsy bitsy (i.e., MUCH!) envious of this one! Oh, and what's the name/initials scratched on the grips? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jscott Posted 8 March , 2014 Author Share Posted 8 March , 2014 It a W89 actually (the photo isn't particularly clear). Re the fullers, I'm not entirely sure what the distinction is (i.e. what constitutes long v short), so I've attached a shot below. And the initials seem to be "FJM". Cheers, J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 8 March , 2014 Share Posted 8 March , 2014 I believe WKC would have produced the blade and then supplied it to Erfurt for the final assembly. Erfurt of course was the Royal Prussian arsenal, and were busy making the rifles. WKC was notable for producing both types of fullers that are found on these bayonets. This example is the long fullered version with fullers extending virtually to the tip (1st Pattern) Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 8 March , 2014 Share Posted 8 March , 2014 It a W89 actually ... the fullers, I'm not entirely sure what the distinction is (i.e. what constitutes long v short)... A W/89 is also OK for W K & C plus Erfurt. Yours has the long fullers, entirely appropriate for the year. the short fullers have a square end that stops short of the point/ Trajan EDIT: Thanks SS, yours came in as I was writing this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 8 March , 2014 Share Posted 8 March , 2014 I believe WKC would have produced the blade and then supplied it to Erfurt for the final assembly. Erfurt of course was the Royal Prussian arsenal, and were busy making the rifles. WKC was notable for producing both types of fullers that are found on these bayonets. This example is the long fullered version with fullers extending virtually to the tip (1st Pattern) Cheers, S>S Would you clarify 1st Pattern? The first version of these had short square-ended fullers, and an L-spring catch; second version short square-ended fullers and a press-button catcg; 3rd pattern the long fullers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 8 March , 2014 Share Posted 8 March , 2014 Pretty sure that date marking is an 88 actually, it's just been partially worn off with age and use. Erfurt are only down as having made these during 1888 so probably correct. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 8 March , 2014 Share Posted 8 March , 2014 And for those who really like obscure bits of information, the Weyersburg designed press-stud and internal spring mechanism of the catch was patented on 06 Jan 1882, so beginning the gradual replacement of the long-lived L-shaped leaf-design! Check out http://www.waffensammler-kuratorium....sg7184pat.html So, you might ask, why did the first version of the 71/84 have a leaf-spring? The answer seems to be patenting rights... Weyersberg supplied these with the Serbian M1880 and 1884; the Danish Remington trial 1883 and M1867/1884 (a friend gave me this information). But the trial versions of the 71/84 (dated 1885) were blanks made by Alex. Coppel and finished at Erfurt, and evidently they had no access to the Weyersberg patent for the internal coilspring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 8 March , 2014 Share Posted 8 March , 2014 Pretty sure that date marking is an 88 actually, it's just been partially worn off with age and use. Erfurt are only down as having made these during 1888 so probably correct. That's what I thought... BUT I can refer you to at least seven W/89 WK & C / ERFURT marked regimental, reserve, and medic examples if you would like me too, so 89 is not to be discounted! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Haselgrove Posted 8 March , 2014 Share Posted 8 March , 2014 Another very interesting thread. Attached is a photo of a postcard in my collection showing two S71/84s. Unfortunately it is not dated but note the ZF12 sight so definitely 1912 or later. Regards, Michael. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 8 March , 2014 Share Posted 8 March , 2014 Lovely photograph! Here's another, Strassburg, September 1914. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 8 March , 2014 Share Posted 8 March , 2014 ...a postcard in my collection showing two S71/84s. Unfortunately it is not dated but note the ZF12 sight so definitely 1912 or later...Michael. Should have said what's a ZF 12 sight but I'll find out later! Any idea on the troddel or any troddel experts out there? Got a 2 hr. class to finish preparing for Monday or I miss the rugby tomorrow, as otherwise I'd have a crack at it... Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Haselgrove Posted 10 March , 2014 Share Posted 10 March , 2014 Hi Trajan, In order to save you time looking it up, the Zielfernrohr 12 (ZF12) is a 2.5 power optic sight introduced in 1912. Thereafter, every MG08 was issued with one. In the photo the ZF12 is clearly to be seen clamped onto the sight base attached to the rear left of the MG08's receiver above the gunner's left hand. There are several models of the ZF12 sight. The one in the photo is the most common and was made by Emil Busch AG of Rathenau. Regards, Michael. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 10 March , 2014 Share Posted 10 March , 2014 Thank you Michael! That is a lovely photograph - in action or posed? Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Haselgrove Posted 10 March , 2014 Share Posted 10 March , 2014 Julian, Almost certainly posed in my opinion. Very difficult to get everyone to look in the right direction and remain still in action and note the clean uniforms/kit and the walking stick. Regards, Michael. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now